scholarly journals Foreword to 'Producing and Processing Quality Beef from Australian Cattle Herds'

2001 ◽  
Vol 41 (7) ◽  
pp. I
Author(s):  
Dick Austen

Markets for Australian beef throughout the 20th century have been moulded by world wars, economic depressions, droughts, transport technology, cattle breeding, trade barriers, global competition, livestock disease eradication, human health risks, food safety, Australian Government policy, consumerism and beef quality. Major ‘shocks’ to beef marketing include the development of successful shipments of chilled carcases to Britain in the 1930s, the widespread trade disruption caused by World War II, expansion (early 1950s) and then a reduction in beef exports to Britain (1956), the introduction and then proliferation of Bos indicus derived cattle in northern Australia (1960s), licensing and upgrading of Australian abattoirs to export to USA and the consequential brucellosis and tuberculosis eradication campaign leading to record export tonnages of Australian processing beef to USA (1960–70). In 1980, increased beef trade to Japan began, leading in the late 1980s to expansion of high-quality grain finished products into that market. By 1993, beef exports to Japan (280.5 kt) exceeded those to USA (274.4 kt), signalling the significant shift in beef exports to Asia. Commencing in about 1986, the USA recognised the value of beef exports to Asian markets pioneered by Australia. Australia’s share of the Japanese and South Korean markets has been under intense competition since that time. Another major influence on Australia’s beef market in the early 1990s was growth in live cattle exports to Asian markets in Indonesia, Malaysia and the Philippines. Live exports accounted for 152000 heads in 1992 and 858000 heads in 1996. Improved management systems (e.g. fences) and consequent regulation of cattle supply even in the wet season, a by-product of the brucellosis and tuberculosis eradication campaign, were indirect drivers of the growth in live exports. Throughout the period 1940–2000, domestic consumption of beef and veal declined from 68 to 33.3 kg/head.year, reflecting competition from other foods, perceptions of health risks, price of beef, periodic food safety scares, vegetarianism, changes in lifestyle and eating habits and lack of consistency of eating quality of beef. Despite this decline, the domestic Australian beef market still consumes a significant component (37%) of total Australian beef production. In 1984–85, the reform of the Australian Meat and Livestock Corporation set in train a major directional change (‘New Direction’) of the beef sector in response to beef market trends. Under Dick Austen’s leadership, the Australian Meat and Livestock Corporation changed the industry’s culture from being ‘production-driven’ to being ‘consumer-driven’. Market research began in Australia, Japan and Korea to establish consumer preferences and attitudes to price, beef appearance and eating quality. Definite consumer requirements were identified under headings of consistency and reliability. The AusMeat carcass descriptors were introduced and a decade later traits like tenderness, meat colour, fat colour, meat texture, taste, smell, and muscle size were addressed. These historical ‘shocks’ that shaped the Australian beef markets have all been accompanied by modification to production systems, breeding programs, herd structure, processing procedures, advertising and promotion, meat retailing and end-use. The increasing importance of the food service sector and the ‘Asian merge’ influence on beef cuts usage in restaurant meals and take-away products are the most recognisable changes in the Australian food landscape. The Cooperative Research Centre¿s research portfolio was built around the changing forces influencing beef markets in the early 1990s. Australia needed to better understand the genetic and non-genetic factors affecting beef quality. One example was the poor success rate of cattle being grain-fed for the Japanese premium markets. Another was the relative contribution of pre- and post-slaughter factors to ultimate eating quality of beef. The Meat Standards Australia scheme was launched in 1997 to address this problem in more detail. The Cooperative Research Centre contributed significantly to this initiative. In the year 2001, Australia, with only 2.5% of world cattle numbers retains the position of world number one beef trader. We trade to 110 countries worldwide. The Australian beef sector is worth A$6 billion annually. The diversity of Australian environments, cattle genotypes and production systems provides us with the ability to meet diverse specifications for beef products. A new set of market forces is now emerging. Strict accreditation rules apply to Australian producers seeking access to the lucrative European Union market. Transmissible spongiform encephalopathies like bovine spongiform encephalopathy and scrapie are a continuing food safety concern in Europe. This and the foot and mouth disease outbreak in Britain early in 2001 have potentially significant indirect effects on markets for Australian beef. And the sleeping giant, foot and mouth disease-free status of Latin American countries Brazil, Uruguay and Argentina continues to emerge as a major threat to Australian beef markets in Canada and Taiwan. As in the past, science and technology will play a significant role in Australia¿s response to these market forces.

2001 ◽  
Vol 41 (7) ◽  
pp. 861 ◽  
Author(s):  
B. M. Bindon ◽  
N. M. Jones

Markets for Australian beef throughout the 20th century have been moulded by world wars, economic depressions, droughts, transport technology, cattle breeding, trade barriers, global competition, livestock disease eradication, human health risks, food safety, Australian Government policy, consumerism and beef quality. Major ‘shocks’ to beef marketing include the development of successful shipments of chilled carcases to Britain in the 1930s, the widespread trade disruption caused by World War II, expansion (early 1950s) and then a reduction in beef exports to Britain (1956), the introduction and then proliferation of Bos indicus derived cattle in northern Australia (1960s), licensing and upgrading of Australian abattoirs to export to USA and the consequential brucellosis and tuberculosis eradication campaign leading to record export tonnages of Australian processing beef to USA (1960–70). In 1980, increased beef trade to Japan began, leading in the late 1980s to expansion of high-quality grain finished products into that market. By 1993, beef exports to Japan (280.5 kt) exceeded those to USA (274.4 kt), signalling the significant shift in beef exports to Asia. Commencing in about 1986, the USA recognised the value of beef exports to Asian markets pioneered by Australia. Australia’s share of the Japanese and South Korean markets has been under intense competition since that time. Another major influence on Australia’s beef market in the early 1990s was growth in live cattle exports to Asian markets in Indonesia, Malaysia and the Philippines. Live exports accounted for 152000 heads in 1992 and 858000 heads in 1996. Improved management systems (e.g. fences) and consequent regulation of cattle supply even in the wet season, a by-product of the brucellosis and tuberculosis eradication campaign, were indirect drivers of the growth in live exports. Throughout the period 1940–2000, domestic consumption of beef and veal declined from 68 to 33.3 kg/head.year, reflecting competition from other foods, perceptions of health risks, price of beef, periodic food safety scares, vegetarianism, changes in lifestyle and eating habits and lack of consistency of eating quality of beef. Despite this decline, the domestic Australian beef market still consumes a significant component (37%) of total Australian beef production. In 1984–85, the reform of the Australian Meat and Livestock Corporation set in train a major directional change (‘New Direction’) of the beef sector in response to beef market trends. Under Dick Austen’s leadership, the Australian Meat and Livestock Corporation changed the industry’s culture from being ‘production-driven’ to being ‘consumer-driven’. Market research began in Australia, Japan and Korea to establish consumer preferences and attitudes to price, beef appearance and eating quality. Definite consumer requirements were identified under headings of consistency and reliability. The AusMeat carcass descriptors were introduced and a decade later traits like tenderness, meat colour, fat colour, meat texture, taste, smell, and muscle size were addressed. These historical ‘shocks’ that shaped the Australian beef markets have all been accompanied by modification to production systems, breeding programs, herd structure, processing procedures, advertising and promotion, meat retailing and end-use. The increasing importance of the food service sector and the ‘Asian merge’ influence on beef cuts usage in restaurant meals and take-away products are the most recognisable changes in the Australian food landscape. The Cooperative Research Centre¿s research portfolio was built around the changing forces influencing beef markets in the early 1990s. Australia needed to better understand the genetic and non-genetic factors affecting beef quality. One example was the poor success rate of cattle being grain-fed for the Japanese premium markets. Another was the relative contribution of pre- and post-slaughter factors to ultimate eating quality of beef. The Meat Standards Australia scheme was launched in 1997 to address this problem in more detail. The Cooperative Research Centre contributed significantly to this initiative. In the year 2001, Australia, with only 2.5% of world cattle numbers retains the position of world number one beef trader. We trade to 110 countries worldwide. The Australian beef sector is worth A$6 billion annually. The diversity of Australian environments, cattle genotypes and production systems provides us with the ability to meet diverse specifications for beef products. A new set of market forces is now emerging. Strict accreditation rules apply to Australian producers seeking access to the lucrative European Union market. Transmissible spongiform encephalopathies like bovine spongiform encephalopathy and scrapie are a continuing food safety concern in Europe. This and the foot and mouth disease outbreak in Britain early in 2001 have potentially significant indirect effects on markets for Australian beef. And the sleeping giant, foot and mouth disease-free status of Latin American countries Brazil, Uruguay and Argentina continues to emerge as a major threat to Australian beef markets in Canada and Taiwan. As in the past, science and technology will play a significant role in Australia¿s response to these market forces.


2005 ◽  
Vol 45 (8) ◽  
pp. 959 ◽  
Author(s):  
W. A. McKiernan ◽  
J. F. Wilkins ◽  
S. A. Barwick ◽  
G. D. Tudor ◽  
B. L. McIntyre ◽  
...  

As a component of the second term of the Cooperative Research Centre (CRC) for Cattle and Beef Quality, a project to further test and validate the effects of varying nutritional growth paths pre-finishing and slaughter on cattle of varying genetic potential for meat yield and eating quality was designed and implemented. This project, ‘Regional Combinations’, was a multi-site experiment, using Bos taurus cattle generated at 4 locations across southern Australia. The design of imposing different growth paths between weaning and finishing on cattle with specific genetic potential is common across sites. Treatment and interaction effects on beef production and meat quality were examined within and across sites. This paper describes the experimental designs, generation of experimental cattle at the various sites and the measurements, collection and storage of the data for multi-site analyses.


2004 ◽  
Vol 44 (7) ◽  
pp. 687 ◽  
Author(s):  
B. M. Bindon

The biology of marbling is a considerable issue for the Australian beef industry. Measurement of the trait is still a concern: subjective assessment based on the degree of visual fat deposition and its distribution is the 'industry standard' and the basis for payment of marbling grades. Yet this measurement may be subject to operator error and is influenced by chiller temperature. Chemical extraction gives an unequivocal measure of all fat in the muscle (intramuscular fat percentage: IMF%) and has higher heritability and genetic variation than marble score; but does this mirror exactly what the trade regards as 'marbling'?Progeny test results from the Cooperative Research Centre (CRC) for Cattle and Beef Quality breeding projects provide improved understanding of breed and genetic effects on IMF% and marble score. Estimated breeding values (EBVs) for IMF% have been released to the industry for 7 breeds. Heritability estimates confirm that genetic progress will be faster when selection is based on IMF% rather than marble score. Genetic correlations of IMF% with growth, retail beef yield (RBY%), P8 fat, residual feed intake (RFI) and tenderness are now available to underpin selection indices. A favourable allele for marbling (TG5) on chromosome 14 has been identified by CSIRO/MLA as a direct gene marker for the trait. This is now being marketed as GeneSTAR marbling. Other favourable chromosomal regions are under investigation by the CRC.Nutritional manipulation of marbling remains problematic. It is accepted that high-energy grain diets achieve higher marbling than pasture diets. Within grain-based feedlot diets higher marbling is achieved with maize than barley, while barley diets in turn are better than sorghum. Steam flaking produces higher marbling than dry rolled grain and this effect is more marked with sorghum than maize. Beyond these establishments there are many uncertainties: experiments have examined the effects of diets with high protein; low protein; protected lipid; protected protein; added oil with and without calcium; vitamin A deficiency. None of these manipulations gave consistent improvement in marble score or IMF%. Commercial feedlots supplying Japanese B3/B4 markets may have successful dietary manipulations to enhance marbling but because of its proprietary nature the information is not normally available for scientific scrutiny.Japan is the only market for Australian beef where marbling is an important component of the market specification. There can be no doubt that marbling meets a special consumer preference in that niche market. In other markets scientific evidence for a link between marbling and beef tenderness or eating quality has been difficult to define (marbling is a key component of the USA grading scheme for primal cuts but Australia is not a big supplier to that market). In the domestic Meat Standards Australia market there is a trend for marbling to become more important as a consumer issue in 5-star products where higher order sensory attributes of beef come into play. Early meat science investigations concluded that beef flavour elements were water-soluble. This would exclude marbling fat as having a notable influence on flavour.Marbling remains the major determinant of carcass value in Australia's most valuable beef market. Research should continue to assist Australian producers to meet the specifications of that market with increased precision and reduced costs.


Foods ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (7) ◽  
pp. 264 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lara Moran ◽  
Shannon S. Wilson ◽  
Cormac K. McElhinney ◽  
Frank J. Monahan ◽  
Mark McGee ◽  
...  

The objective was to compare the quality of beef from bulls reared in typical Irish indoor systems or in novel grass-based systems. Bulls were assigned to one of the following systems: (a) grass silage plus barley-based concentrate ad libitum (CON); (b) grass silage ad libitum plus 5 kg of concentrate (SC); (c) grazed grass without supplementation (G0); (d) grazed grass plus 0.5 kg of the dietary dry matter intake as concentrate (GC) for (100 days) until slaughter (14.99 months). Carcass characteristics and pH decline were recorded. Longissimus thoracis was collected for analytical and sensory analysis. Lower carcass weight, conformation and fatness scores were found for grazing compared to CON and SC groups. CON bulls had highest intramuscular fat and lighter meat colour compared with grazing bulls. The SC meat (14 days aged) was rated higher for tenderness, texture, flavour and acceptability compared with grazing groups. CON saturated and monounsaturated fatty acid (FA) concentration was highest, conversely, omega-3 FA concentration was higher for GC compared with CON, while no differences were found in polyunsaturated FA. In conclusion, while market fatness specification was not reached by grazed grass treatments, beef eating quality was not detrimentally affected and nutritional quality was improved.


Meat Science ◽  
2006 ◽  
Vol 74 (3) ◽  
pp. 435-442 ◽  
Author(s):  
M.A. Oliver ◽  
G.R. Nute ◽  
M. Font i Furnols ◽  
R. San Julián ◽  
M.M. Campo ◽  
...  

Meat Science ◽  
2010 ◽  
Vol 84 (2) ◽  
pp. 293-300 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michel Bonneau ◽  
Bénédicte Lebret

2003 ◽  
Vol 76 (3) ◽  
pp. 387-399 ◽  
Author(s):  
E. Dransfield ◽  
J.-F. Martin ◽  
D. Bauchart ◽  
S. Abouelkaram ◽  
J. Lepetit ◽  
...  

AbstractThe quality of grilled steaks was assessed by experienced panellists in longissimus thoracis (LT), semitendinosus (St) and triceps brachii (TB) muscles of Aubrac, Charolais, Limousin and Salers breeds raised in two production systems: 15-, 19- and 24-month-old bulls and 4-, 6- and 8-year-old cull cows.Scores for sensory ‘initial tenderness’, ‘overall tenderness’, ‘juiciness’, ‘residue after mastication’ and ‘flavour intensity’ for all 497 meats were pooled to derive three eating quality classes.Meats from the bulls and cows and from the four breeds were evenly distributed among the three eating quality classes. The highest quality class, representing one third of all the meats, contained 45% of the LT, 35% of the TB and 21% of the St muscles and one third of the meats from the 8-year-old cull cows. The meats in this class tended to have finer fibres, a greater proportion of slow oxidative fibres, slower post-mortem glycolysis, lower connective tissue and higher fat contents than those in the lower classes.Lipid content accounted for proportionately 0·56 of the variation in flavour intensity and pH at 3 h post mortem, 0·52 of the variation in tenderness due to muscle and slaughter age.Considering both young bulls and cull cows together, tenderness was highest in the meats from 15-month-old bulls and low in the meats from the intermediate age groups, and flavour and juiciness was highest in the meats from the oldest animals from each production system.


2013 ◽  
Vol 64 (12) ◽  
pp. 1127 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. J. Yeates ◽  
G. R. Strickland ◽  
P. R. Grundy

This article reviews research coordinated by the Australian Cotton Cooperative Research Centre (CRC) that investigated production issues for irrigated cotton at five targeted sites in tropical northern Australia, north of 21°S from Broome in Western Australia to the Burdekin in Queensland. The biotic and abiotic issues for cotton production were investigated with the aim of defining the potential limitations and, where appropriate, building a sustainable technical foundation for a future industry if it were to follow. Key lessons from the Cotton CRC research effort were: (1) limitations thought to be associated with cotton production in northern Australia can be overcome by developing a deep understanding of biotic and environmental constraints, then tailoring and validating production practices; and (2) transplanting of southern farming practices without consideration of local pest, soil and climatic factors is unlikely to succeed. Two grower guides were published which synthesised the research for new growers into a rational blueprint for sustainable cotton production in each region. In addition to crop production and environmental impact issues, the project identified the following as key elements needed to establish new cropping regions in tropical Australia: rigorous quantification of suitable land and sustainable water yields; support from governments; a long-term funding model for locally based research; the inclusion of traditional owners; and development of human capacity.


1998 ◽  
Vol 38 (1) ◽  
pp. 1 ◽  
Author(s):  
W. J. Wales ◽  
J. B. Moran ◽  
R. W. Harris

Summary. We tested the hypothesis that liveweight gain per hectare could be doubled in beef steers grazing irrigated annual pastures by increasing stocking rate from 2.5 to 5.0 steers/ha and supplementing the heavier stocked treatments with maize silage offered at either 2.4 or 5.6 kg dry matter/steer. day to replicated groups of 4 steers. During an average period on feed of 172 days, liveweight gain was substantially increased, from 245 kg/ha to either 464 or 576 kg/ha, when maize silage was fed to steers at 2064 or 4816 kg dry matter/ha, in association with an increase in stocking rate from 2.5 to 5.0 steers/ha. However, such production systems increased the chance of feed shortages, particularly in exceptionally wet winters such as the one experienced in the experiment. Increasing the rate of supplementary feeding without increasing stocking rate may not be economically viable. Other strategies, such as lot feeding steers, were also tested. Diets where maize silage constituted either 46% dry matter (with the balance of the diet comprising wheat grain, cottonseed meal, urea, bentonite, vitamins and minerals) or 97% dry matter (with the balance of the diet comprising urea, vitamins and minerals) led to steers achieving liveweight gain of 1.34 and 0.93 kg/steer. day respectively. Carcasses from steers eating maize silage fed at pasture or maize silage as a component of lot-fed diets had at least as adequate fat cover and as good eating quality as carcasses from steers grazing at 2.5 steers/ha.


Meat Science ◽  
2000 ◽  
Vol 55 (2) ◽  
pp. 141-147 ◽  
Author(s):  
A.V. Fisher ◽  
M. Enser ◽  
R.I. Richardson ◽  
J.D. Wood ◽  
G.R. Nute ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document